sochum study guide worldmun 2011

UN S ocial , Cultural , and Human Committee

World Model United Nations 2011

Background Guide

Social, Cultural, and Humanitarian Committee

Letter from the Secretary General..............................................................1Letter from the Under-Secretary General...................................................2Letter from the Chair...................................................................................3Introduction................................................................................................4History of the Committee...........................................................................6Topic A: Disabled Persons

Origing of the Problem.........................................................................................8Case Studies.............................................................................................................12Past UN Action.....................................................................................................13Proposed Solutions................................................................................................15QARMA...................................................................................................15

Topic B: The Right to Development History of the Problem............................................................................................17Key Actors..............................................................................................................21Past Actions...........................................................................................................24Proposed Solutions...............................................................................................24 QARMA........................................................................................................25

Position Papers..........................................................................................27Closing Remarks......................................................................................27Appendix.................................................................................................31Bibliography..............................................................................................35

Table of ConTenTs

Cover image courtesy of Singapore Tourism Board.

Letter from the Secretary-General

REIHAN NADARAJAHSecretary-General

REMEN OKURUWADirector-General

IOANA CALCEVUnder-Secretary-General for General Assemblies

SAMIR PATELUnder-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Councils and Regional Bodies

KATHLEEN TANGUnder-Secretary-General for Specialized Agencies

KENNETH LIUnder-Secretary-General for Strategy

CHARLENE WONGUnder-Secretary-General for Administration

APARAJITA TRIPATHIUnder-Secretary-General for Business

Dear Delegates,

It is my utmost pleasure to welcome you to World Model United Nations 2011! My name is Reihan Nadarajah, and I will serve as your Secretary-General for WorldMUN’s 20th conference. The conference staff of WorldMUN has been hard at work, ensuring that you receive the best substantive experience before, during and even after conference has ended. Within this document, you will find the study guide for your committee. Each Chair has worked to display his or her interest and passion for the topics found within this guide. They have researched extensively to provide you with the best possible overview of each committee’s topic area.

This study guide should serve as a launching pad for all your research; research that will be pivotal in ensuring you have as rewarding an experience as possible in committee. The WorldMUN Spirit asks each delegate to step into the shoes of those from entirely different cultures to yours, to gain a better understanding across borders, and this starts with your research. As you prepare for conference, look closely at this guide, and use the additional resources suggested by your Chair to learn more about the topic, and your represented position on it. Please also use the additional resources on our website: WorldMUN 101 (a guide to everything MUN), and the Rules of Procedure – both of which have been revamped this year. Also feel free to e-mail your Chair, or your Under-Secretary-General at any point during the preparation process if you have questions or would like assistance. Later in the winter, we will also place updates on recent developments on the topics on the website, written by your Assistant Chairs.

Good luck with your preparation, and I hope you enjoy reading this Study Guide! I look forward to meeting you in Singapore in March!

Sincerely,Reihan NadarajahSecretary-GeneralWorld Model United Nations [email protected]

March 14 - March 18 2011

Letter from the Under-Secretary-General









Dear Delegates of the General Assembly,

It is with great pleasure that I welcome you to the General Assembly of WorldMUN 2011! My name is Ioana Calcev and I am very excited to be Under-Secretary-General for this conference. Model United Nations has been an important part of my life since high school and throughout college, and I am genuinely thrilled to meet students from all over the world who strive to make the world a little better each day.

The General Assembly is the organ where every nation has an equal voice in addressing international problems and promoting new initiatives. This year, the General Assembly is home to some of WorldMUN’s most challenging committees. Ranging from traditional United Nations bodies such as the Disarmament and International Security Committee and the Special Political and Decolonization Committee to the World Intellectual Property Organization. The issues discussed in committee promise to be both a great learning experience as delegates participate in intense debate, negotiation, and diplomacy.

Please take the time to read the background guide thoroughly and familiarize yourself with the topics at hand. Your Chair and Assistant Chairs have been working very hard to put together amazing committees that will help you have the best possible experience in Singapore. The following guide is the result of many hours of research and hard work. However, the background guide is by no means all encompassing. Rather, it is meant to serve as a launching pad for further research and investigation. If you have any questions about the material at hand please do not hesitate to contact your Chair or myself.

Enjoy reading this study guide and be sure to make the most of it. I look forward to meeting all of you in Singapore!

Sincerely, Ioana CalcevUSG General Assembly Harvard WorldMUN [email protected]


Letter from the Chair









Hello Delegates!

My name is Edlira Nasi and I’d like to welcome you to the Social and Humanitarian Committee of World Model United Nations 2011, the 20th conference that the WorldMUN team is organizing!

I am a senior at Harvard, concentrating in Social Studies. I am originally Albanian but have lived most of my life in beautiful Greece! I have been participating in Model United Nations sessions many years now and I truly enjoy discussing with and meeting interesting people. Other than that I am also involved in the Harvard Model Congress Executive Board, where I work on a similar conference for high school students. Academically, I am interested in Human Rights issues, interna tional law as well as issues of comparative immigration in Europe and the US.

As far as my other interests are concerned, I enjoy sleeping (!) listening to music, watching chick-flick movies or simply hanging out with friends.

The topics I’ve chosen for the SOCHUM Committee to discuss are not only very interesting but also important for development and human rights issues. You will be asked to discuss the issue of the disabled persons and the right to development. For many people both issues are considered an integral part of the mission of the United Nations. The issue of disabled people has been transformed in the last 20 years however not in all nations. The second topic is one that is considered very controversial as it implies responsibilities for both the nation states and the international community. I am hoping that you will find the topics both interesting and challenging.

I look forward to meeting all of you and having a great time! Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.

Sincerely, Edlira NasiSOCHUM Chair Harvard WorldMUN 2011


S O C H U M C h a i r :E d l i r a N a s is o c h u m @ w o r l d m u n . o r g

Harvard WorldMUN 2011 Social, Cultural, and Humanitarian Committee 6

Social, Cultural, and Humanitarian

Committe INTRODUC TION

The topics that the Social Humanitarian Committee will be discussing are persons with disabilities

and the right to development. The first topic will be discussing the situation for persons with disabilities. While the issue is not a recent one, it is only in the last 20 years that it has gained recognition and been considered an important issue for the protection of human rights. Indeed, if we take a look at statistics we will see that roughly ten percent of the world population is disabled in some manner. In SOCHUM you will be called to make a thorough evaluation of the status of persons with disabilities. This means that we will consider the definition of disability, the ways in which our policies have been successful or have failed and how we can improve the situation. We will be also called to put the issue within the broader context of development, the Millennium goals and the ways in which the topic of disability is linked to development. Finally, the committee will produce a resolution that will incorporate new suggestion for the improvement of UN programs and goals on disability rights. The second topic we will be discussing is that of the right to development. Is there after all such a right? First we will be discussing how the United Nations have been defining the right, what the prevalent opinions in the United Nations have been and how various nations have reacted in past events when the right to development has been mentioned as a reason for nations to intervene and protect populations. In SOCHUM you will be asked to consider which ones of our policies seem to have promoted the right to development and the ways in which they have done so. Moreover, is there a discrepancy between what we, as the members of the UN, preach and practice? Does the interpretation of the right change when we discuss our own populations vs. when we discuss other nations’ populations? In the end, you will be asked to

provide a comprehensive method for the protection of the right, by taking into consideration the differences in standards in many nations but also by maintaining a standard for the protection of the right. This study guide is only serving as an introduction to the topic. It is by no means extensive and does not cover all aspects of the issue. I hope you enjoy reading it and please let me know if you have any questions.

HISTORY OF THE COMMIT TEE

The General Assembly committees were created in 1946. The Social Humanitarian and Cultural

Committee was initially called the Third Committee of the GA. Like all GA committees, SOCHUM’s resolutions, decisions, and recommendations are not binding upon any of the members. However the tone and recommendations of the committee are crucial as they can order or recommend studies and programs that are in most cases indispensable, especially when dealing with issues such as humanitarian aid, development or health. Moreover, SOCHUM has the added responsibility of working on human rights issues and overseeing many of the projects of the subsidiary organs and ad-hoc committees. For example, SOCHUM oversees the work of the Human Rights Council. Some of the organs and subsidiary committees SOCHUM works with are the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, the Department of Political Affairs, United Nations Children’s Fund, United Nations Development Fund for Women, United Nations Development Programme, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees and the UN Office on Drugs and Crime. In fact, SOCHUM’s work is related to the work of most UN committees as the range of topics is extended. According to the United Nations, SOCHUM deals with “a range of social, humanitarian affairs and human rights issues that affect peoples all over the world.” 1 This explains why the committee deals with topics such as “the advancement of women, the protection of children, indigenous issues, the treatment of refugees, the promotion of fundamental


freedoms through the elimination of racism and racial discrimination, the promotion of the right to self- determination, and issues related to youth, family, ageing, persons with disabilities, crime prevention, criminal justice, and drug control.”2

Topic A: Disabled Persons

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Estimates of the number of disabled people in the world vary according to the different definitions

and parameters used when counting the disabled. According to the World Health Organization disabled people make up between 4 to 17 percent of the world population with variations between developed and developing countries and rural and urban areas.3 In general, the UN considers it appropriate to estimate approximately 10 percent of every community is disabled . In 1989, UNICEF calculated that there were 514 million disabled people (a number much increased by now due to the increase of the world population) and about 75-80 percent of those disabled live in the developing world.4 Moreover, one out of every four people will face a mental disorder, in some context considered as a disability, at some point in their life.5

One can therefore understand why the SOCHUM committee would focus on the issue of disability. The issue is central not only as a societal, developmental and cultural issue, but also as an issue that is directly linked to the issue of poverty, welfare as well as to that of the advancement of women and the protection of children. According to a DAA (Disability in Action)/UNESCO report (1995),malnutrition accounts for 20 percent of the disabled population, accidents (including trauma and war injuries ) accounts for 15.6 percent, infectious diseases for 11.2 percent, non-infectious diseases for 20 percent, and congenital diseases for 20 percent of the total disabled population. The issue of disability is not restricted to the developed world; in fact it is more prevalent in the developing world. As seen by the above percentages,

there is a clear link between poverty and impairments since causes such as malnutrition, war accidents, and infectious and non infectious diseases tend to be prevalent in the developing world where poverty reigns.6 The issues surrounding disabled persons start first of all with the definition of the word and thus the definition of who is to be considered disabled. Although in the developing world disability is linked to benefits that the disabled get as part of welfare plans, in the rest of the world, where the majority of disabled people live, disability isa source of discrimination and exclusion. This dangerous interrelation of poverty and disability puts the disabled in an inferior position where exclusion is a natural occurrence and where the chances of escape are non-existent The role of the United Nations is crucial in

Human Rights High Commissioner Louise Arbourhttp://genevalunch.com/blog/2008/03/04/louise-ar-bour-rumoured-to-be-leaving-human-rights-post/


dealing with this problem. The United Nations have already adopted the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which while adopted by many members of the United Nations, has not changed the way disabled people are treated especially in the developing world. Moreover, the United Nations has yet to embed projects against the discrimination of disabled persons in the sphere of work done on development. In fact, many of the current projects lack the technical support, rehabilitation, technology use etc. that can make the life of disabled people better. The United Nations Global Programme on Disability has stated: “Disability tends to be couched within a medical and welfare framework, identifying people with disabilities as ill, different from their non-disabled peers, and in need of care. Because the emphasis is on the medical needs of people with disabilities, there is a corresponding neglect of their wider social needs.”7 The United Nations needs to take coordinate action that hits on all issues affecting disabled people: societal norms, practical impediments and discrimination.

ORIGIN OF THE PROBLEM

The issue of disability has been prominent in the last 30 years in most international organizations.

Beforehand, little had been done despite the large eugenics projects, sterilisations and experimentation that had taken place in Nazi Germany. It was only after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1949), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights were voted that the issues of disability came to the surface and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was voted (2006).8 While I will not cover the history of the movement, I am providing below a short overview of key treaties and key-points pertaining to disability theory. In the 1970s the UN organized many rehabilitation programs for disabled persons, programs that were the first steps towards the inclusion of disabled persons. In the 1980s the UN declared the first International Year of Disabled

Persons; the first United Nations Decade of Disabled Persons was announced in 1983, expanding upon the initial year. Moreover, some countries, following the example of the UN decade of disabled persons, adopted decades of disability such as the Asian and Pacific Decade of Disabled Persons (1993–2003) and the African Decade of Disabled Persons (1999–2009). The programs, with varying degrees of success, were aimed at informing the governments and the public.9 The first document adopted on disabled people was the UNCRPD, the United Nations Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities (1993).10 The document included issues such as access to services, education, support etc. As most UN documents though, the recommendations and decisions of the UNCRPD were not binding on nations. Therefore, the effectiveness of the document may have been limited as decisions remained only in paper and were applied in a limited fashion.

Defining and Measuring Disability

The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities defines disabled persons according to

the following: “Persons with disabilities include those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual, or sensory impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.”11However extensive, the provision of a definition leads inherently to the exclusion of some people from the group of those benefitting from support for disabled people.12 Its definition is important not only because it affects the measures which are to be taken to deal with the issue, but also more significantly, because definitions tend to formulate the way in which society thinks about disability. The last few decades have seen an increase in the efforts to define disability, both in the international political community and the medical one. Medical professionals first tried to design a definition based on the International Classification of Diseases which was focused on the results that the disease or disorder had on the person involved.13 In 1980, the World Health Organization adopted the International Classification of Impairments,


Disabilities and Handicaps, which while very effective on the medical community was not particularly accepted by those suffering from disorders.14

The two most usual models of disability are the individual model and the social model. In the individual model disability is seen as an “observable physical, mental, sensory or psychological deviation from normality caused by disease, trauma or another health condition.”15 The individual model assumes there is some normality from which a disabled person deviates. Moreover, it places importance on the individual by not taking into consideration the physical or social environment. Clearly, the model is based on medical research that marks the difference between normality and deviation.16 Disability in the individual model can be defined or measured in many ways. One of the ways is QALY (Quality Adjusted Life Years). According to QALY, disability can be measured by losses from premature death that the disability causes or the loss of healthy life from the

disability.17 Other similar systems that are based on the individual model are the economic one (equation of disability with human harm that leads to the loss of earning capacity), the philanthropic one etc.18

The social model sees disability as a social construct. Disability according to this model exists as a notion not because there is some inherent normality and abnormality, but because we as a society we have created norms of normality and abnormality. The model sees for example how governments, institutions, personalities, economic forces etc. form our views of disability. The model is heavily based on theories of inclusion and exclusion, minority status and hence of the injustices that are done due to our societal constructs.19 The Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation has presented a definition that reads as follows and is heavily based on the social model: “A disabled person is an individual in their (sic) own right placed in a disabling situation, brought

Press Conference: Trade Unions at Johannesburg: “Grounding Sustainability in Reality”27 August 2002

http://www.un.org/events/wssd/photos/020827pressphotos.htm


about by environmental, economic and social barriers that the person, because of their (sic) impairment(s), cannot overcome in the same way as other persons.

These barriers are all too often reinforced by the marginalizing attitudes of society. It is up to society to eliminate, reduce or compensate for these barriers in

order to allow each individual to enjoy full citizenship, respecting the rights and duties of each individual”20

So does disability lie in the person or does it lie in society? All detailed definitions of most countries speak of “impairments”, “conditions” etc. thus placing disability on the individual model. In these cases, it is the person who bears the disability. At the same time, many countries have also adopted non-discrimination laws that describe societal norms and emphasize that disabled persons should not be discriminated against or that they should receive special benefits. However, all these definitions and laws also demand that one shows a prima facie disability in order to be a member of the community of disabled, hence placing again importance on the individual basis of disability. Definitions of disability among countries vastly differ. In the USA, the Americans for Disability Act (1990) uses a broad definition of disability. “The term ‘disability’ means, with respect to an individual – • a physical or mental impairment that substantially

limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual;

• a record of such impairment; or• being regarded as having such an impairment.” On the other hand, the European Court of Human Rights has very broadly defined disability. In the Winterwerp case, Mr. Winterwerp, a national of the Netherlands, was confined year after year in a psychiatric hospital and was never given the chance to prove his mental stability. According to the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 5, 1(e) which states that “the lawful detention of persons for the prevention of the spreading of infectious diseases, of persons of unsound mind, alcoholics or drug addicts, or vagrants; “ 22 his freedom can be constricted. However, the European Court of Human Rights decided that “Mental illness may entail restricting or modifying the manner of exercise of such a right [of liberty], but it cannot justify impairing the very

essence of the right. Indeed, “special procedural safeguards may prove called for in order to protect the interests of persons who, on account of their mental disabilities, are not fully capable of acting for themselves.”23 The case essentially provided a very broad definition of disability which may be even considered as an open term that evolves in time. However, many have argued that in our effort to avoid discrimination, we have neglected to change the discriminatory way in which we characterize disabled people. The term “disabled” implies that disabled people are lacking in comparison to the “able ones.” Instead, many suggested that the term “people with capabilities” is more appropriate as it suggests a more positive and inclusive view, and thus non-discriminatory way of referring to people. The capability approach was first used by Nobel Prize winner and Harvard Professor Amartya K.Sen who “advocated focusing on a person’s capability to function, that is, what the person can do or can be versus the more standard concentration on opulence (the person’s real income) or utility (as in traditional welfare economics).”24 According to Sen’s theory, we should focus on the opportunities that the perceived disability/capability can bring.

Development, Poverty, Disability

As mentioned before, poverty and disability are unfortunately intricately interrelated. Poverty

leads to unequal opportunities for the disabled; according to UNESCO less than 10 percent of children with disabilities in Africa attend school.25At the same time, disability leads to limited opportunities and thus to a greater chance of staying in poverty; according to the International Labor Organization (2007) persons with disabilities are statistically less likely to be in formal employment.26 Poor people are more prone to having disabilities, as they have little maternal and child health services, no access to clean water, education etc. Adding to that problem, poor people have usually very limited political and voting power; poor disabled people have no chance of avoiding marginalization.27 In an interesting case study, Manderson notes that in many poor societies the care of the disabled is simply impossible due to the cost of long term


care. While people take care of their children for a relatively prolonged period, they do so in expectation of reciprocity. Children are valued not because of their value as unique individuals but because of their perceived value in the future. In many cultures, children or daughters alone are responsible for the care of their elderly parents. For disabled people, there is no such notion of reciprocity (“I took care of you, thus you take care of me in my old days”) and the cost of their care is unbearable in societies where the work for living is hard.28 This does not imply that in these cultures people do not care for their disabled, or that children solely care for their parents out of a sense of reciprocity alone; that would indeed be a cynical view of the world. But poverty, lack of education, and lack of support all explain why some societies cannot care for disabled persons or provide them with opportunities for development. The lack of support is more prominent in the

case of women. Women with disabilities are doubly excluded and marginalized, and are particularly vulnerable to violence, exploitation, and sexual abuse. “Globally, women make up three-fourths of the disabled people in low- and middle- income countries; between 65% and 70% of those women live in rural areas.”29 Moreover, disabled girls have a higher mortality rate due to lack of medical care and support.30 However, this is not only due to the lack of material support, but also due to the lack gender equality. In general women tend to enjoy fewer social, economic, and cultural advantages. Thus, the United Nations have adopted a two-tier program to cope with the issue.31 The program considers both the empowerment of women and the disability aspect. Although the United Nations has made recommendations to developing nations, very little has been done in the direction of womens’ empowerment and equal treatment.

Slums of Mubai, Inida http://stateofthenation.ca/?p=428


C ASE STUDIES

In this relatively small section, I will be addressing a few important and interesting cases that have dealt

with disability in many areas of the world.

US –The Americans with Disabilities Act (1990) Signed into law in 1990 by George W. Bush Sr., this Act is one of the most important and inspirational in many ways document for the international community, despite its application on an individual nation alone. The Act transformed both the conception of disabled people but it also transformed the working environments and services in society. The Act affected the way disabled people are hired, fired, their working spaces, access to public services and

their everyday life. The Act noted that “the continuing existence of unfair and unnecessary discrimination and prejudice denies people with disabilities the opportunity to compete on the equal basis and to pursue those opportunities for which our free society is justifiably famous.”32 The statute deals with five sectors linked with disability: employment, state and local governments, privately operated accommodations, goods and services available to the public, telecommunications and miscellaneous provisions.33The ADA was not only important because of its breadth and coverage of principal issues regarding disabled subjects, but also because it enabled and empowered disabled persons. The ADA led to

2005 World Summithttp://www.responsibilitytoprotect.org/index.php/about-rtop/related-themes/2417-pbc-and-rtop


important structural changes in American businesses and social life, including small but important details like making streets and services (both public and private) accessible, making jobs more accessible and degrees mandatory, and finally by giving legal and social power to disabled people to advocate for their right to health and development.

India

India has an estimated population of disabled people of about 22 million people.34 In India, Section 2

(10) of persons with Disabilities,Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act 1995, defines disability as “meaning blindness, low vision, leprosy-cured, hearing impairment, locomotor disability, mental retardation and mental illness.”35 The term handicap is often used to describe disabled people too. However, as the World Health Organization has noted in many cases, handicap is a disadvantage term as it implies that one can not fulfill the requirements of a role.36

As far as legislative protection is concerned, India has taken significant steps in the legal protection of personal liberty and social justice. The Indian Constitution protects social justice; however it does not directly refer to disabilities. The Mental Health Act of 1987 provides several protections for the mentally disabled such as that admission to jail for non-criminal mentally ill people should be illegal.37 The National Trusts Act of 1999 which death with cases of persons with autism, cerebral palsy, mental retardation and multiple diseases provides various protections for these categories of people including welfare after their parents’ death, need based services etc.38 The Persons with Disabilities Act of 1995 treats disability as a civil right and states that disabled people have been clearly marginalized in the past. Many of the responsibilities for the support of the disabled are however up to the state and not much is mentioned about the social aspect of disability can be dealt with.39 Even though the legislation seems adequate, the same cannot be said about the actual results of this legislation. Given that the implementation of legislation that transforms social life for disabled people (in many cases this involves building special entrances for disabled people, funding awareness

programs etc.) requires a great financial endowment in order to be successful, much of what is mentioned in the Act has been hardly implemented. In many cases, police detains mentally ill people, while women are unprotected and vulnerable to physiological and psychological disabilities.40 Moreover, many great acts like the Hindu Marriage Act, the Adoption Act, and the Special Marriage Act show very little protection and even less sensitivity towards disabled people.41

PAST UN AC TION

In 1993, the General Assembly and member states adopted the Standard Rules on the Equalization of

Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities, which offer guidelines for policy making. The Standards referred to accessibility, research, discrimination etc. A 2005 research pertaining to the impact of the Standards displayed them as highly ineffective. While two thirds of countries have taken some initiative, 79 out of 114 countries have failed to adopt any guidelines regarding awareness-raising, media portrayal of disability etc., while in education little to nothing was done.42Forty seven out of 114 countries had done little regarding employment accessibility, while in more than half these countries disabled people do not have the same opportunities as nondisabled people.43

In 2001, the General Assembly of the United Nations was due ‘to consider proposals for a comprehensive and integral international convention to promote and protect the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities.’44 The Ad Hoc Committee established a working group in order to start drafting a document with NGOs and interested parties and in October 2004 45 the Montreal Declaration on Intellectual Disability (Montreal Declaration) at an international conference organized by the Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO) and the World Health Organization (WHO). Even though the declaration is not comprehensive, it deals with mental and intellectual disabilities.46

In 2006 the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was created and adopted, a document which serves as the most up-to-date and comprehensive one. Moreover, disabled rights can be


inferred from treaties like ICESCR Article 2(1) and CRC Article 4, which asks that international assistance is provided to achieve the right to health. 47 “This responsibility, which is particularly incumbent on developed states arises in the context of commitments made at recent world conferences, including the Millennium Summit and Millennium

Development Goal 8.48

Millennium Goals

Disability is not clearly mentioned in the Millennium Development goals, however, the

United Nations has made it one of its priority points. So far, the rehabilitation of people in war zones such as Angola, Burundi, Cambodia etc has been up to

1955: A man looks at one of the first documents published by the United Nations, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

http://www.answers.com/topic/universal-declaration-of-human-rights-large-image


organizations like Handicap International. However, focus has started to shift towards disability too, seeing as how many of the Millennium goals cannot be addressed without addressing disability too. 49

According to the United Nations the priorities of the Millennium Goals regarding the disabled are as follow:• “The Millennium Development Goals cannot be

achieved without the full and effective inclusion of persons with disabilities and their participation in all stages of the MDGs processes.

• The current MDGs framework, tools and mechanisms provide several opportunities to mainstream disability in the MDGs.

• The existing data gaps on disability within the context of the MDG evaluation and monitoring continues to be a major challenge. Available data, however, could be used to support the inclusion of disability in current MDG evaluation and monitoring processes, while on-going and new MDG evaluation and monitoring efforts should add a disability component as part of their overall data collection endeavors.

• Specific measures should be taken for mainstreaming disability at global, regional and national levels for short-term, medium-term and long-term results.

• With a view to the 2010 periodic review, priority should be given at this time to targeting actions at the global level in the context of monitoring.

• Collaborations should be initiated within the United Nations system and with relevant stakeholders to foster strategic thinking and planning on the MDGs and disability. In this regard, establishing an informal resource group could ensure that a platform for on-going dialogue and feed back is possible.” 50

PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Disability requires that we ameliorate the conditions through which life is made accessible. Thus we need to address the inherent causes and links of disability to development and poverty. Moreover, cultural values should be weighed against international practices to allow for a culturally sensitive but efficient

movement to an equal opportunity life for disabled people.51

Policy

As mentioned before it is essential that policy is adopted to enable disabled people to

have ownership over their rights and life. The mainstreaming of international legislation into national law is crucial to the protection of disabled people. However, mainstreaming legislation is not enough unless it is accompanied by international effort and pressure to make disability discrimination a rare phenomenon.

Increasing participation

Often the group concerned with the issue is not the group creating legislation. While NGOs

participate in discussions, the voice of the disabled themselves especially in the developing world is rarely heard. Participation of disabled groups would allow for a more effective targeting of policy towards these groups.

Strengthening the co-operation between and with the Member States

Unfortunately, the developing countries will hardy be able to adhere to the standards of treaties

like the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. International cooperation, the better adjustment of the Millennium goals, and community projects need to be strengthened by the United Nations and member states.

Accountability

Like in the case of India, legislation may be adopted but there is usually little accountability towards

the international community. It is imperative that any initiative is coupled with a system of accountability that creates guarantees for the success of projects.

Q U E S T I O N S A R E S O L U T I O N M U S T A N S w E R

The main thing to remember when dealing with disability in the United Nations is the fact that the

members of the United Nations do not all perceive


rights in the same universal, and rather Western manner in which the international community has so far identified rights. Similarly, not all nations have the same resources to devote to protecting the rights of disabled people. Some questions that this committee will have to address might therefore have different answers in different contexts and nations. How can the SOCHUM committee contribute to the improvement of the definition of disabled people? How can that definition be more inclusive of disabled people instead of marking them as a group that is lacking to the rest of the “normal” population? How can cultural differences be addressed? Is there a universal legislative framework that needs to be applied? If no, what are the minimum standards that need to be applied in every nation? How can we better address the problem presented by the intrinsic link between poverty, development and disabilities? How can we better target effective projects related to disabilities and development? Can we evaluate the effectiveness that the Millennium goals have had with regard to disabilities? How can we better cooperate on issues of disabilities and the achievement of development goals? How can we address vulnerable groups like women or children, within the sphere of disabilities? Can you propose ways in which we can create more public/non-profit partnerships for disability projects? Are there ways to improve the current partnerships? Can you set a time schedule for the achievement of your goals?

KEY AC TORS AND POSITIONSEuropean Union and the EU Disability Strategy 2010-2020

The European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 is not in fact a new project but rather a renewal of an

existing program. The EU Commission has set up a High Level Group of Member States’ Representatives on Disability, which will review initiatives and politics of governments regarding disabilities and will draw ideas that can be applied elsewhere in the EU too. The EU has also a budget (Budget line B3-4111), which allows it to implement measures that support organizations for disabled people as well as organizations that are run by disabled people.52

At the same time though, the European Union does not see the measures as being adequate to fighting discrimination. To that end, the Commission has also decided to go ahead to a revision of the policies implemented towards non-discrimination. The EU will review whether its social policies have been inclusive of disability issues and how these measures have affected disabled people. .53 This revision would make it possible that the governments do not waste money on programmers but instead adjust their existing social policies to respond to disabled persons’ requirements.

Proclamation on the Full Participation and Equality of People with Disabilities in the Asian and Pacific Region

The decade of 1993 to 2002 was proclaimed to be the Asian and Pacific Decade of Disabled Persons.

The Asia and Pacific Region is especially important to the issue of disability as some of the greatest issues with the protection of disabled people are presented there. The Proclamations specifically notes that most of the services for disabled people have to be provided by families, society and NGOs and not by the social care sector of nations. In some nations there is clear lack of legislation that protects disabled people.54 Moreover, while the growth rate of nations in Asia Pacific is the highest one in the world, it has not led to many improvements. Adding to that there is also a difficulty in evaluation progress in the area, as in most cases data and statistics is not reliable. The area also faces the challenge of being rather diverse in both its development levels and protections that are provided to each nation’s citizens. A second campaign was proclaimed for 2004-2013 and in 2010 the United Nations Economic and Social Committee for Asia and Pacific declared that there is need for a third campaign for 2013-2022. Moreover, the committee suggested that disability needs to be incorporated in the overall agenda for development for Asia Pacific.55

PAHOThe Pan American Health Organization has adopted guidelines for the protection of disabled people, with a special focus on persons with mental problems. The reason there is a focus on mental health problems is because in Latin America especially, mental


rehabilitation centers tend to violate many of the rights of their patients, including, but not limited to, the right to privacy, communication, voluntary admittance into a clinic and to the right to be treated with humanity and respect.56 On November 1990 PAHO adopted the Declaration of Caracas which set the basis for the protection of persons with disabilities and mental health problems. In 2009, PAHO also adopted the Principles of Brazil. The principles of Brazil reiterate the need to promote mental health rehabilitation programs but also the need for exchange of information regarding successful and unsuccessful policies thus far implemented in Latin American countries. Moreover, the document notes that there has been a dramatic rise in recent years in mental health issues as a result of urbanization and the increase of morbidity and psychosocial problems among both adults and children and adolescents.57

F U R T H E R R E S E A R C H

As I mentioned in my introductory note, this guide is simply a review of views and theories

on disability issues. The guide is merely a way for you to be introduced to the issue and is by no means extensively covering the topic. Further research will be necessary if you want to offer new ideas and solutions to this problem. While not everyone is interested in disability theory, I consider studying the theory behind definitions of disability as a great way to understand the way in which the notion of disability has evolved and how definitions affect our perception of normality and abnormality. One of the greatest scholars that has written on both disabilities and development issues is Martha Nussbaum, whose book Frontiers Of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership has been influential in modern philosophical thought. Beyond theory though, I would suggest that you go over the treaties adopted so far both by the United Nations and regional groups and unions like the EU. Ideally, you should be able to make a two-fold chart of the legislative and actual measures taken so far by different interest groups and different areas of the world. This will help you assess whether the issue lies in legislation or implementation. Moreover, this will allow you to

provide new points instead of “recycled,” and possibly already proven ineffective recommendations. The best resource for this purpose is the United Nations website and more specifically the following agencies and documents:• “Fifth Quinquennial review and appraisal of the

World Programme of Action concerning Disabled Persons” (Report of the Secretary General)

• “Keeping the promise: realizing the Millennium Development Goals for persons with disabilities towards 2015 and beyond” (Report of the Secretary General)

• Participation Of Persons With Disabilities In Pacific Island Countries In The Context Of The Asian And Pacific Decade Of Disabled Persons, 1993-2002, And Beyond

• United Nations Enable• United Nations High Commissioner for Human

Rights


Topic B : Right to Development

H I S T O R Y A N D D I S C U S S I O N O F T H E P R O B L E M

On Human Rights Day 2006, the High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour stated:

“All countries, independent of national wealth, can take immediate measures to fight poverty based on

human rights[…] But as much as States bear the primary responsibility for their own development, the international community must also meet the

commitments it has made to support the efforts of developing countries. Many rich countries have yet to meet development assistance targets they have

accepted, yet they continue to spend ten times more on military budgets. They also spend nearly four times

their development assistance budget “an amount almost equal to the total gross national product of African countries” to subsidize their own domestic agricultural producers. Indifference and a narrow calculus of national interests by wealthy countries

hamper human rights and development just as damagingly as discrimination at the local level.”58

Many theorists see the right to development as another facet of social disparities and inequalities. Their main claim is that the right to development is another way of ensuring distributive and commutative justice. This approach states that it is unfair and immoral to deny some people access to basic human services.. Paul Farmer, founder of Partners in Health and a Harvard University Professor of Medical Anthropology, has advocated the social justice approach, especially the right to health as a universal human right.59 At the same time however, he notes that the human rights movement has failed to consider the importance of economic, social and cultural rights in its quest for development. For example, he is against reformism and the efforts of many people and developed countries to assist countries via adoption of technological advances

or imitation developed countries’ practices.60 At the same time, however, this approach is largely based on subjective standards. Much of what we consider to be an injustice is based on our subjective view of what are deemed basic standards of life. Another Harvard professor and Economics Nobel prize winner, Amartya Sen has advocated for a capabilities approach to development. For Sen, development is not the acquisition of more goods but the ability and freedom to choose how one is going to live his life.61 Sen’s capability approach is important in that it shifts attention away from the importance of income in development economics and to the importance of other factors such as premature mortality, undernourishment and illiteracy.62 Martha Nussbaum, another philosopher provided a link between capabilities and human rights, by providing a list of ten areas of life where people should be rendered capable, or otherwise have the freedom of choice. 63

The right to development may be one that is to be protected according to international law but the legislation that actually provides for it is quite vague. The right has not transcended the boundaries of soft law as it is still derived from two important, though not universally adopted, pieces of legislation: the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. 64 The first covenant refers to civil rights, whereas the second one asks states to protect citizens. Both Covenants are non-binding and are not universally accepted legal norms. Still, the right to development is considered of equal importance as other UN defined rights. According to the United Nations Development Programme:“Human development shares a common vision with human rights. The goal is human freedom. And in pursuing capabilities and realizing rights, this freedom is vital. People must be free to exercise their choices and to participate in decision-making that affects their lives. Human development and human rights are mutually reinforcing, helping to secure the well-being and dignity of all people, building self-respect and the respect of others.”65 The right first appeared after the decolonization process in the 1950s and 1960s, as more developing countries of the world started joining the United


Nations. On 26 November 1957 “the General Assembly expressed the view that a balanced and integrated economic and social development would contribute towards the promotion and maintenance of peace and security, social progress and better standards of living, and the observance of and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.”66A factor that led to the emergence of the right was also the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which took place because of the Yom Kipur War. Moreover, as the divide between the North and the South widened, a “New International Economic Order” was created. 67 In 1977 the General Assembly of the UN adopted a resolution that stated:“Human rights questions should be examined globally, taking into account both the overall context of the various societies in which they represent themselves as well

as the need for the promotion of the full dignity of the human person and the development and well-being of the society.”68

Most of the countries realized that the goals discussed in the UN were either very difficult to achieve or unattainable due to structural obstacles that problematized long-term commitment to these goals.69 With the onset of the Cold War, much of the right to development was forgotten. However, with the fall of communism and renewed optimism, countries returned to discussing the right. In 1986 the General Assembly adopted Resolution 41/128 which declares that there is a right to development with the Declaration on the Right to Development.70 What is unique about this right is that it is not limited only to individuals, as are most rights that are protected by the UN. Specifically, Article 1 (2) of Resolution 51/128 declares that:

Disabled people in Athletics


“All human beings have a responsibility for development, individually and collectively, taking into account the need for full respect for their human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as their duties to the community, which alone can ensure the free and complete fulfillment of the human being, and they should therefore promote and protect an appropriate political, social and economic order for development.” Moreover the resolution ensured that this responsibility to uphold the right belongs to the government, in Article 2 (1): “States have the primary responsibility for the creation of national and international conditions favourable to the realization of the right to development.”71

The Resolution defined what the right to development includes:• Full sovereignty over natural resources • Self-determination • Popular participation in development • Equality of opportunity • The creation of favourable conditions for the

Enjoyment of other civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights 72

While the majority of these goals are thrust upon individual governments, in essence they place responsibility on the international community as well. Terms such as “sovereignty” and “self determination” point to the international community and its responsibility to make sure that such rights are protected. In March 2010, the Endorois people, a sub tribe of Central Kenya won a case against the Kenyan government. The Endrois were evicted from their lands near Lake Bogoria in the 1970s.73 The Endorois suggested that this movement would not allow them to have access to clean water anymore, to their worship sites, and other requirements of their pastoral life. The Kenyan government did not respond to these claims and did not compensate the tribe. In return, the Endorois people turned to the judicial branch and after finding no remedy at the national court level, moved to the regional African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights. The ACHPR decided that Kenya had violated Articles 1, 8, 14, 17, 21 and 22 the African Charter which included the rights to free practice of religion, property, education, culture, natural resources and development. This is one of the first instances in

which an international tribunal recognized a right to development. But with whom does this responsibility to protect lie? Kirchmeicher defines the responsibilities of the state with regard to the right to development to be threefold: First, there is the obligation of all states to abstain from any actions that could cause violations of human rights. Then, there is the duty to actively protect citizens and human rights against any acts that could violate rights. Finally there is the duty to fulfill rights by means of legislation and a framework of realization of their economic, social and cultural rights.74 However, what does the complete fulfillment of the right to development entail? The right to development is not explicit for many states and cannot exist alone. It implies the existence of other rights that support its existence and are directly linked to it. These corollary rights are listed below.75 Please note that there are more rights related to the right of development, such as the right to education, health etc. that must also be taken into consideration.

Right to adequate standard of living

According to Article 11 (1) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural

Rights “States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions.”76 The right to an adequate standard of living is a basic right directly correlated with both the right to development as well as the right to food, a healthy environment etc. Right to a healthy environment

Often considered an extension of the right to health, the right to a healthy environment has come to

be viewed as a unique right directly linked to the right to development, due to the broader humanitarian implications of climate change. The Asia Pacific Forum estimates that the rise in sea levels can potentially displace up to three million people in the region alone, leading to the creation of a new class of “environmental refugees”77 According to the African Charter on Human Rights the right to development is dependent on the right to live in a healthy environment:


“All peoples shall have the right to a general satisfactory environment favorable to their development.78

This does not appear to be the trend for all regional organizations though. According to the Stockholm Declaration of the 1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, the right to a healthy environment exists, but it is also a responsibility of people and not simply an eternally granted right. Specifically, the Declaration states that “Man has the fundamental right to … adequate conditions of life, in an environment of a quality that permits a life of dignity and well-being,” but additionally that man “bears a solemn responsibility to protect and improve the environment for present and future generations.”79 The Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights also states in Article 11 that there is a right to a healthy environment and that:1. “Everyone shall have the right to live in a healthy

environment and to have access to basic public

services. 2. The States Parties shall promote the protection,

preservation, and improvement of the environment.”80

Right to Food

In our globalized world, resources are controlled by small groups of people and corporations. So far, global

consensus dictates that national governments should be responsible for food and agricultural issues and that international bodies only have an advisory role.81 This opinion has been partly reinforced by the international system that is based on the idea of sovereign nations. As a result, there are no international bodies that are responsible to ensure food security, since this issue seems to be restricted to specific territories and is not of a global nature. However, as writers like John Tobin have stated, in fact huamans are not as independent as they think, and food security is one more issue that illustrates man’s interdepedence. Tobin suggests that we

Special Olympics are one of the most noteworthy activities serving people with intellectual disabilities 2003 Olympics Ireland

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2003_Special_Olympics_Opening_Crowd.JPG


should not try to figure out responsibility after there has been a failure to deliver, but rather turn to cooperation. 82

But what happens when this right is not ensured by national governments? To what degree is the international community obliged to help? One of the recent legal principles in the UN is the responsibility to protect (R2P). While the principle was created with gross human rights violations in mind, many writers have stated that it also implies duties for other rights.

The Responsibility to Protect

“The ‘responsibility to protect’ should imply that affected states, donor governments, and partner

agencies alike, make all efforts to bring sovereignty, political will, mandates and resources into alignment with better protection….”83France’s foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner (who was one of MSF’s founders), has suggested invoking a UN principle of the “responsibility to protect”84

During the 2005 World Summit, the UN General Assembly unanimously adopted the collective international “responsibility to protect” (R2P) populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. The World Summit Outcome document recognized the responsibility of all

governments to protect its population from these four egregious crimes. Most important is the critical role and responsibility of the international community through the United Nations to protect those same populations85. The Summit Outcome document establishes a four part approach to R2P as follows: • “Each individual state has the primary responsibility

to protect its population from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity; and this responsibility includes prevention.

• The international community should assist states to exercise this responsibility and ensure early warning capabilities are established and maintained.

• The international community has a complementary responsibility to protect populations , which is fulfilled through appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian, and other peaceful means through the UN and in accordance with Chapters VI and VIII of the UN Charter.” 86

KEY AC TORS AND POSITIONSThe African Union

According to the Banjul Charter which was adopted in 1981 and Article 22:

“All peoples shall have the right to their economic, social and cultural development with due regard to their freedom and identity and in the equal enjoyment of the common heritage of mankind. States shall have the duty, individually or collectively, to ensure the exercise of the right to development.” While the Charter predates the resolution of the UN on the right to development, this regional charter indicates that in the African context, the right to development is seen as a collective right to be protected by the nation and not simply one to be left to an individual’s own agency to provide for his basic needs. In general, the African Union regrets the fact that there is no collective protection of the right to development. While it agrees that there should be partnerships created, it also notes that the focus of the discussion has unfairly shifted to the responsibility of the countries themselves to provide for the protection of the right, instead of trying to find ways in which countries can collaborate to promote the right.87 According to Professor Stephen Marks, there is a

In many countries children with learning disabilities do not get the chance to be schooled


group of countries called “Like-Minded Group” (LMG) which consists of some of the African countries and other developing nations: Algeria, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, Cuba, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Sudan, and Vietnam. Their interests lie mainly in promoting the idea that the responsibility to protect should be employed to “reduce inequities of international trade, the negative impacts of globalization, differential access to technology, the crushing debt burden, and similar factors they see as detrimental to the enjoyment of human rights and development.”88

United States

The United States’ position is rather ambiguous: while the country recognizes the right to development, it

has not voted for resolutions that would advance the right to development.89 For the US there is a human right to development that should allow each human to act freely in tapping into his full potential. However, the US does not agree that there is a right of nations to development since the right to development is a human right, and nations are obviously not entitled to the same right as individuals. Therefore, the US still blocks resolutions that make any indication of a debt of responsibility of developed countries to developing countries due to the right of development. Resolution (A/RES/64/172) was adopted last fall in the General Assembly regarding the Right to Development, Preambular paragraph 7 stated:“Deeply concerned that the majority of indigenous peoples in the world live in conditions of poverty, and recognizing the critical need to address the negative impact of poverty

Disability initiatives need to take into consideration development issueshttp://www.unescap.org/unis/press/2010/jun/g31.asp


and inequity on indigenous peoples by ensuring their full and effective inclusion in development and poverty eradication programmes. …”90

The United States voted against this resolution because the topics seemed “extraneous.” Moreover, the United States representatives at the UN Human Rights Council stated in 2003 that “States . . . have no obligation to provide guarantees for implementation of any purported “right to development.”91

However that does not seem to the official position of the government after the change in political leadership. President Obama recently declared that “too often, this community has heard grand promises from Washington, that turned out to be little more than empty words. And I pledged to you then that if you gave me a chance, this time it would be different.” and that he “intend[s] to send a clear message that all of our people – whether they live in our biggest cities or our most remote reservations – have the right to feel safe in their own communities, and to raise their children in peace, and enjoy the fullest protection of our laws.”92

Germany & European Union Nations

While supporting the right to development, Germany also notes that the right should not

focus on international cooperation but domestic policies that are enabled by the developing nations. Therefore, for Germany there is no reason any state should think that another state has a particular responsibility towards it. Instead, Germany focuses on economic development that can be achieved through “equity with growth.” For Germany, trade, development and human rights can all ensure that the right to development is provided. This view of the right can be combined with the Millennium Development goals to provide the necessary ground for the development of the right. However, the main position of Germany and many other European countries remains that rights are understood differently in different contexts and that member states should be aiming to help these countries through trade and nation-specific definitions of rights.93 Moreover, countries in the EU prefer to keep their commitment on a volunteer basis as a way to avoid further future demands from developing countries.94

PAST UN AC TIONS

The most important document for the right to development is obviously the Declaration to the

Right to Development, which was adopted in 1986, which is described in other sections of this guide. In 1993, at the World Conference on Human Rights, 171 countries adopted the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action that revived the development process and human rights protection. At the Vienna Conference the Right to Development was for the first time described as “an integral part of human rights.”95 The Commission on Human Rights established the open-ended Working Group on the Right to Development by its resolution 1998/72 and Economic and Social Council decision 1998/269.96 Though initially projected to be in place for two years, the mandate of the group has been extended. The mandate of the open-ended Working Group includes, among other functions: “to monitor and review progress made in the promotion and implementation of the right to development to review reports and other information submitted by States and international or non-governmental organizations”97

P R O P O S E D S O L U T I O N S National Action

The Working Groups stressed that “[s]tates have the primary responsibility to ensure the conditions

necessary for the enjoyment of the right to development, as both an individual and a collective right. Development cannot be seen as an imported phenomenon or one that is based on the charity of developed countries.”98 Countries themselves have the responsibility to grow economically. Development should involve devising policies that will be beneficial in the long term and that will allow for the protection of the right to development. Beyond this, the population as well as the government should be actively participating in development efforts; the point is not simply to allot blame to national decision-making but to allow citizens to have ownership over the state and the problems it faces.99 This includes dealing with issues such as the extreme levels of corruption that many developing countries face and the structuring of appropriate goals for the future.


International Cooperation

International cooperation involves not only the UN but also other agencies that work with it such as

the World Bank, the IMF, and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. The UN should play a larger role in the promotion of the right, and the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights should also play a bigger role in making sure that the right is not simply mentioned but also actively respected.100 Moreover, financial institutions like the OECD and the World Bank need to be involved in the process, not only as lending institutions but as active promoters of the right to development.101 Efforts should include investment floes, exchange of technology, and a commitment to spending important percentages of the

GDP towards the realization of the right to development.However one must note that while international cooperation has been invaluable, it has also placed great burdens upon developing nations. “It is submitted that the structural adjustment policies of the IMF and World Bank, whatever their contribution to debt relief, have placed an intolerable burden on the poorest populations of the developing world.102

Q U E S T I O N S A R E S O L U T I O N

M U S T A N S w E R • Is the right to development a collective or individual

human right? • Is it even a human right?

The combination of disability and old age can prove to be a significant burden on families. In the developed world many old people have opted or been led to live in elderhostels.

http://www.niamhsmyth.ie/news.html


• Who should exercise the right to development? Governments or individuals?

• Who should ensure the right to development? • Who is supposed to protect and enable the

enjoyment of that right? Is the international community responsible for the protection of the right to development? Is the responsibility legal or moral alone?

• Can one be entitled to such a right when there are no resources to satisfy this right?

• How can the international community promote the protection of this right?

• Which are the different sectors of development one will have to address in protecting this right?

• What measures have been successful, and what measures have failed? What can be learned and applied from each?

S U G G E S T I O N S F O R F U R T H E R R E S E A R C H

This has been an introduction into the topic of the right to development. Many aspects of the right

could not have been possibly covered in one guide, and therefore to understand all aspects of the topic, delegates will have to move to further research. In this guide I have attempted to give a theoretical framework for the right, through which more specific solutions can be found. If you are interested in knowing

The United Nations, as part of a “peace day” celebration in Liberia, organized a soccer match among amputees: All people with disabilities have a right to participate actively in society.

Photograph: UN / Christopher Herwig


more about the theoretical aspects of the right, one of the most prolific writers on the topic is Professor Stephen Marks. His book “The Human Right to Development: Between Rhetoric and Reality,” which is available online through the Harvard Law School Journal, is a great source for an introduction to the topic. The same is the case for the book Reflections on the Right to Development (ed. Sengupta, Negi, Basu), which was published in 2005 by the Centre for Development and Human Rights. For more information on the topic you can also explore the book “The right to development: a primer” by the Centre for Development and Human Rights, which discusses all aspects of the topic, including rights that are directly correlated with the right to development. Beyond this point, your best resource is the internet. You will be able to find all resolutions from the GA and various human rights committees and working groups on the internet. Seeing as this topic is relatively new and not one that has been of keen interest to the UN so far, information is quite disperse and available by separate organs and organizations.

Position Papers The position papers are a very important part of your

preparation for the committee, not only because they will be summarizing the main points that you support and the goals that you are trying to achieve but also because they are going to help you organize and better prepare yourself for the conference. You will see that by writing your country’s positions on a piece of paper you will better understand what the policy really is. The position paper is traditionally organized in some paragraphs that mention the statement of the problem, previous action and solutions that your country would support sections. This first paragraph should include all those important issues that are related to the problem according to the policy of your country. For example, on the topic of disability you could write about how your country regards the right to disability and whether it is of importance to its policy. The second paragraph should refer to the actions that your country has made in the past and the

policies that it has adopted or suggested for adoption in the past. For example, if we are discussing the right to development you could mention how your government has actively pursued the protection of the right, policies it has adopted and/or aid it has provided. The last section should briefly mention solutions that the country’s policy would allow or policies that have been suggested and the country’s policy does not agree with. For example, when discussing disability you should mention whether your country views it as possible to adopt disability policies that provide for the transformation of cities or the transformation of legislation in the workspace, especially if your country is a developing country that cannot afford such investments and radical changes.

Closing Remarks The topics that we will be discussing are important

not only for the protection of the rights of marginalized groups in every society but also because they pose questions about both the effectiveness of our development policies for those groups and the ways in which we understand human rights. However the point of the discussions of these topics is to improve the situation and it exactly here that the heart of this process, the readings and the discussions lie. This study guide will help you start thinking about the topic but if you want a more detailed understanding of the situation try to find other readings. Try to do as much reading as possible because in the end it will be worth it. That being said, I very well understand that it is not possible to now the most minute detail or know every resolution voted and decisions taken! After all the topics are very general and encompass many different arenas of policy and UN work. Sometimes it might feel that you are lost among the different medical, philosophical, social and human rights sources you may find; I myself faced the same problem. Try to see what will help you understand the problem and eventually lead you to some proposals. If at any point you feel lost, cannot find information and you do not know what to do please do not hesitate to contact me! Best of luck with your research and I look forward to seeing!


Endnotes1 United Nations 61st Session. Available at:http://www.un.org/ga/61/third/third.shtml2 Third Committee-SOCHUM. Available at:http://www.un.org/en/ga/third/index.shtml3 Majid Turmusani. “Disabled People and Economic needs in the Developing World. A political perspective from Jordan.” Ashgate:2003, page 164 Turmusani page 175 World Health Organization (WHO), The World Health Report 2001: Mental Health: New Understanding, New Hope 1 (2001) [hereinafter World Health Report 2001].6 Ibid page 197 Victor Pineda.’AWorld Enabled’ Fighting for the Human Rights of Persons with Disabilities” in UN Chronicle. No 4, 20048 -- “UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with disabilities” European Journal of Health Law 14 (2007) 273-298, page 2739 Maria Kett, Raymond Lang & Jean-Francois Trani “disability, development and the dawning of a new convention: a cause for optimism?” in Journal of International Development J. Int. Dev. 21, 649–661 (2009)10 Kett page 654 11 UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities12 The UN Convention page 27613 Aart C. Hendricks. Different Definition-Same Problems-One way out? in Disability Rights Law and Policy, International and National Perspectives. (ed. Mary Lou Breslin, Silvia Yee) Transnational Publishers: 2002, page 19914 Hendricks page 19915 Ibid page 19916 Ibid page 20017 Ibid page 20018 Ibid page 20019 Ibid 20120 Waddington in Different Definition-Same Problems-One way out?, page 20221 Americans for Disability Act, 42 USC §12102(2)22 European Convention on Human Rights23 Winterwerp v. Netherlands 6301/73 (1979)24 Sophie Mitra. “The Capability Approach and Disability” in Journal Of Disability Policy Studies Vol. 16/NO. 4/2006/ PP. 23625 Maria Kett, Raymond Lang & Jean-Francois Trani “Disability, Development and the Dawning of a New Convention: A Cause For Optimism?” in Journal of International Development J. Int. Dev. 21, 649–661 (2009)

26 Kett page 65027 Kett 65028 Lenore Manderson. “Disability Global Legislation and Human Rights.” In Society for International Development, 2004, 47(2), (29–35), page 3229 --Women with disabilities and International Development. US Aid. Available at:http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/cross-cutting_programs/wid/gender/wwd.html30 Ibid31 Women and Girls with Disabilities. UN Enable. Available at: http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?navid=13&pid=151432 Silvia Yee ad Marilyn Golden. “Achieving Accessibility: how the Americans With Disabilities Act is Chnaging the Face and Mind of a Nation’ Disability Rights Law and Policy, International and National Perspectives. (ed. Mary Lou Breslin, Silvia Yee) Transnational Publishers: 2002, page 41333 Ibid page 41434 Awadesh Kumar Singh. Rights of the Disabled. Perspective, Legal protection and Issues. Serials Publications:200835 Singh page 17336 Ibid page 17437 Ibid page 17838 Ibid page 17939 Ibid page 18040 Ibid page 18141 Ibid page 18142 Sergio Urias. “Overview of the United Nation Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”. LLM paper. Haravrd Law School.2007, page 1643 Urias page 1644 Paul Hunt, Judith Mesquita. “Mental Disabilities and the Human Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health” in Human Rights Quarterly, Volume 28, Number 2, May 2006, pp. 332-35645 The UN Convention page 27646 Hunt page 35247 Ibid page 35248 Hunt page 35249 Stewart W Mercer, Rhona MacDonald. “Comment” in The Lancet Vol 370 August 18, 200750 MDGs. United nations Enable. Available at:http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=1470#about51 Manderson 3252 The European Union Disability Strategy. Available at:http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/soc-prot/disable/strategy_en.htm 53 Ibid


54 E/ESCAP/SB/PIDC(7)/1, April 2002 “Participation Of Persons With Disabilities In Pacific Island Countries In The Context Of The Asian And Pacific Decade Of Disabled Persons, 1993-2002, And Beyond”55 “Promotion of rights of persons with disabilities stressed”. Abrar Online. 25 October 201056 Almeida & Vasquez. PAHO Advocacy Strategies for the Protection and Promotion of the Human Rights of Persons with Mental Disabilities and Their Family Members” 6 August 2002. Ad Hoc Committee on an International Convention.57 The Brasilia Principles58 “Message of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour.” Available at: http://www.un.org/democracyfund/XNewsHumanRightsDay.htm59 Stephen Marks. “The Human Rights Framework for Development: Seven Approaches” in Reflections on the Right to Development (ed. Sengupta, Negi, Basu). Centre for Development and Human Rights:2005, page 3160 Marks, page 3061 Marks, page 3162 Ibid 3163 Marks, page 3464 Felix Kirchmeicher. “The Right to Development:Where do we stand?” Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.Number 23, July 2006. Available at: http://www.fes-globalization.org/publicationsGeneva/FESOccPapers23.pdf65 Human Development Reports. UNDP. Available at: http://hdr.undp.org/en/humandev/66 N. J. Udomban. “The Third World and the Right to Development: Agenda for the Next Millennium” in Human Rights Quarterly 22 (2000) 753–787 © 2000 by The Johns Hopkins University Press, page 76367 Udomban, page 76368 G.A. Res., GAOR 32nd Sess., U.N. Doc. A/Res/32 (1977)69 Kirchmeicher 870 Declaration on the Right to Development, G.A. Res. 41/128, annex, 41 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 53) at 186, U.N. Doc. A/41/153 (1986) [hereinafter DRD]71 Resolution 51/12872 The right to Development. Available at: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Development/Pages/DevelopmentIndex.aspx 73 Yeniva Massaquoi “Toward a Right to Development? : Reflecting on the Endorois Decision”. In Legal Frontiers. 9 April, 2010. Available at:http://www.legalfrontiers.ca/2010/04/toward-a-right-to-development-reflecting-on-the-endorois-decision/74 Kirchmeicher 12

75 Lynch, Owen.“Human Rights, Environment, and Economic Development: Existing and Emerging Standards in International Law and Global Society” in the Center for International Environmental Law. Available at: http://www.ciel.org/Publications/olp3iii.html 76 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights77 “Protect Right to Healthy Environment” Asia Pacific Forum. Available at: http://www.asiapacificforum.net/news/jurists-call-for-right-to-environment.html 78 African [Banjul] Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, adopted June 27, 1981, OAU Doc. CAB/LEG/67/3 rev. 5, 21 I.L.M. 58 (1982)79 “Do we have a Human Right to a Healthy Environment?” April 23, 2009.Available at: http://www.wbez.org/episode-segments/do-we-have-human-right-healthy-environment80 Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights “Protocol of San Salvador” Available at: http://actrav.itcilo.org/actrav-english/telearn/global/ilo/law/oasadd.htm 81 Kent, George. “Global obligations for the right to food” Rowman & Littlefield. 2008, page 382 Kent, 883 Erika Feller, Statement by the Assistant High Commissioner for Protection, at 4, delivered to the 57

th Session

of the Executive Committee to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, available at: http://www.unhcr.org/excom/44b36a6d2.html, Geneva, 2 October 2006. 84 “Aid Trickles in, Misery Mounts”. The Economist. May 12th 2008. Available at: http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=1135889985 Barbour. Brian. 2008. Embracing the ‘responsibility to protect’: a repertoire of measures including asylum for potential victims. Issues in Refugee Research: Research Paper 159. The UNHCR Policy Development and Evaluation Service. Available at: www.unhcr.org/publications, p386 Embracing the ‘responsibility to protect’ p 6-787 Kirchmeicher 1488 Marks, Stephen. The human right to development: Between Rhetoric and Reality. Harvard Human Rights Journal. Available at: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/hrj/iss17/marks.shtml#fn3 89 Kirchmeicher 1490 Jasper, Susan. “US position on collective rights needs clarification” in Indian Country Today. 27 September 2010. Available at: http://www.indiancountrytoday.com/opinion/US-position-on-collective-rights-needs-clarification-103706804.html91 United States Government, Statement at the U.N. Commission on Human Rights, 59th Sess., Comment on


the Working Group on the Right to Development (Feb. 10, 2003) in Marks, Stephen. The human right to development: Between Rhetoric and Reality. Harvard Human Rights Journal. Available at: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/hrj/iss17/marks.shtml#fn3 92 US position on collective rights93 Kirchmeicher page 13-494 Kirchmeicher page 1595 Vienna Declaration Paragraph 10: “The World Conference on Human Rights reaffirms the right to development, as established in the Declaration on the Right to Development, as a universal and inalienable right and an integral part of fundamental human rights.”96 Office of the UNHCR. Available at: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/development/groups/index.htm 97 Ibid98 Report of the Working Group on the Right to Development, 3d Sess., U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/ 1995/2799 Udomban page 773100 Ibid page 781101 “The right to development: a primer”, Centre for Development and Human Rights. Sage 2004, page 64102 Ibid page 778


Appendix41/128. D E C L A R AT I O N O N T H E R I G H T T O D E v E L O P M E N TThe General Assembly,Having considered the question of the right to development,Decides to adopt the Declaration on the Right to Development, the text of which is annexed to the present resolution.

Declaration on the Right to DevelopmentThe General Assembly, Bearing in mind the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations relating to the achievement of international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural or humanitariannature, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion, Recognizing that development is a comprehensive economic, social, cultural and political process, which aims at the constant improvement of the well-being of the entire population and of all individuals on the basis of their active, free and meaningful participation in development and in the fairdistribution of benefits resulting therefrom, Considering that under the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in that Declaration can be fully realized, Recalling the provisions of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Recalling further the relevant agreements, conventions, resolutions, recommendations and other instruments of the United Nations and its specialized agencies concerning the integral development of the human being, economic and social progress and development of all peoples, including those instruments concerning decolonization, the prevention of discrimination, respect for and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms, the maintenance of international peace and security and the further promotion of friendly relations and co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter, Recalling the right of peoples to self-determination, by virtue of which they have the right freely to determine their political status and to pursue their economic, social and cultural development, Recalling also the right of peoples to exercise, subject to the relevant provisions of both International Covenants on Human Rights, full and complete sovereignty over all their natural wealth and resources, Mindful of the obligation of States under the Charter to promote universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction of any kind such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status, Considering that the elimination of the massive and flagrant violations of the human rights of the peoples and individuals affected by situations such as those resulting from colonialism, neo-colonialism, apartheid, all forms


of racism and racial discrimination, foreign domination and occupation, aggression and threats against national sovereignty, national unity and territorial integrity and threats of war would contribute to the establishment of circumstances propitious to the development of a great part of mankind, Concerned at the existence of serious obstacles to development, as well as to the complete fulfilment of human beings and of peoples, constituted, inter alia, by the denial of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, and considering that all human rights and fundamental freedoms are indivisible and interdependent and that, in order to promote development, equal attention and urgent consideration should be given to the implementation, promotion and protection of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights and that, accordingly, the promotion of, respect for and enjoyment of certain human rights and fundamental freedoms cannot justify the denial of other human rights and fundamental freedoms, Considering that international peace and security are essential elements for the realization of the right to development, Reaffirming that there is a close relationship between disarmament and development and that progress in the field of disarmament would considerably promote progress in the field of development and that resources released through disarmament measures should be devoted to the economic and social development and well-being of all peoples and, in particular, those of the developing countries, Recognizing that the human person is the central subject of the development process and that development policy should therefore make the human being the main participant and beneficiary of development, Recognizing that the creation of conditions favourable to the development of peoples and individuals is the primary responsibility of their States, Aware that efforts at the international level to promote and protect human rights should be accompanied by efforts to establish a new international economic order, Confirming that the right to development is an inalienable human right and that equality of opportunity for development is a prerogative both of nations and of individuals who make up nations, Proclaims the following Declaration on the Right to Development: Article 11. The right to development is an inalienable human right by virtue of which every human person and all peoples are entitled to participate in, contribute to, and enjoy economic, social, cultural and political development, in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realized. 2. The human right to development also implies the full realization of the right of peoples to self-determination, which includes, subject to the relevant provisions of both International Covenants on Human Rights, the exercise of their inalienable right to full sovereignty over all their natural wealth and resources. Article 21. The human person is the central subject of development and should be the active participant and beneficiary


of the right to development. 2. All human beings have a responsibility for development, individually and collectively, taking into account the need for full respect for their human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as their duties to the community, which alone can ensure the free and complete fulfilment of the human being, and they should therefore promote and protect an appropriate political, social and economic order for development. 3. States have the right and the duty to formulate appropriate national development policies that aim at the constant improvement of the well-being of the entire population and of all individuals, on the basis of their active, free and meaningful participation in development and in the fair distribution of the benefits resulting therefrom. Article 31. States have the primary responsibility for the creation of national and international conditions favourable to the realization of the right to development. 2. The realization of the right to development requires full respect for the principles of international law concerning friendly relations and co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. 3. States have the duty to co-operate with each other in ensuring development and eliminating obstacles to development. States should realize their rights and fulfil their duties in such a manner as to promote a new international economic order based on sovereign equality, interdependence, mutual interest and co-operation among all States, as well as to encourage the observance and realization of human rights. Article 41. States have the duty to take steps, individually and collectively, to formulate international development policies with a view to facilitating the full realization of the right to development. 2. Sustained action is required to promote more rapid development of developing countries. As a complement to the efforts of developing countries, effective international co-operation is essential in providing these countries with appropriate means and facilities to foster their comprehensive development.

Article 5States shall take resolute steps to eliminate the massive and flagrant violations of the human rights of peoples and human beings affected by situations such as those resulting from apartheid, all forms of racism and racial discrimination, colonialism, foreign domination and occupation, aggression, foreign interference and threats against national sovereignty, national unity and territorial integrity, threats of war and refusal to recognize the fundamental right of peoples to self-determination. Article 61. All States should co-operate with a view to promoting, encouraging and strengthening universal respect for and observance of all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without any distinction as to race, sex, language or religion. 2. All human rights and fundamental freedoms are indivisible and interdependent; equal attention and urgent consideration should be given to


the implementation, promotion and protection of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. 3. States should take steps to eliminate obstacles to development resulting from failure to observe civil and political rights, as well as economic, social and cultural rights. Article 7All States should promote the establishment, maintenance and strengthening of international peace and security and, to that end, should do their utmost to achieve general and complete disarmament under effectiveinternational control, as well as to ensure that the resources released by effective disarmament measures are used for comprehensive development, in particular that of the developing countries. Article 81.States should undertake, at the national level, all necessary measures for the realization of the right to development and shall ensure, inter alia, equality of opportunity for all in their access to basic resources, education, health services, food, housing, employment and the fair distribution of income. Effective measures should be undertaken to ensure that women have an active role in the development process. Appropriate economic and social reforms should be carried out with a view to eradicating all social injustices. 2.States should encourage popular participation in all spheres as an important factor in development and in the full realization of all human rights.

Article 91. All the aspects of the right to development set forth in the present Declaration are indivisible and interdependent and each of them should be considered in the context of the whole. 2. Nothing in the present Declaration shall be construed as being contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations, or as implying that any State, group or person has a right to engage in any activity or toperform any act aimed at the violation of the rights set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the International Covenants on Human Rights.

Article 10Steps should be taken to ensure the full exercise and progressive enhancement of the right to development, including the formulation, adoption and implementation of policy, legislative and other measures at the nationaland international levels.


Bibliography “UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with disabilities” European Journal of Health Law 14 (2007) 273-298,

page 273

“Women with disabilities and International Development”. US AID. Available at:http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/cross-cutting_programs/wid/gender/wwd.html

Aart C. Hendricks. Different Definition-Same Problems-One way out?in Disability Rights Law and Policy, International and National Perspectives. (ed. Mary Lou Breslin, Silvia Yee) Transnational Publishers: 2002

Almeida & Vasquez. PAHO Advocacy Strategies for the Protection and Promotion of the Human Rights of Persons

with Mental Disabilities and Their Family Members” 6 August 2002. Ad Hoc Committee on an International Convention.

Americans for Disability Act Awadesh Kumar Singh. Rights of the Disabled. Perspective, Legal protection and Issues. Serials Publications:2008 E/ESCAP/SB/PIDC(7)/1, April 2002 “Participation Of Persons With Disabilities In Pacific Island Countries In The

Context Of The Asian And Pacific Decade Of Disabled Persons, 1993-2002, And Beyond”

European Convention on Human Rights

Lenore Manderson. “Disability Global Legislation and Human Rights.” In Society for International Development, 2004, 47(2), (29–35)

Majid Turmusani. “Disabled People and Economic needs in the Developing World. A political perspective from Jordan”. Ashgate:2003

MDGs. United nations Enable. Available at:http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=1470#aboutPromotion of rights of persons with disabilities stressed. Abrar Online. 25 October 2010

Paul Hunt, Judith Mesquita. “Mental Disabilities and the Human Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health” in Human Rights Quarterly, Volume 28, Number 2, May 2006, pp. 332-356

Sergio Urias. “Overview of the united Nation Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”. LLM paper. Harvard Law School.2007

Silvia Yee ad Marilyn Golden. “Achieving Accessibility: how the Americans With Disabilities Act is Chnaging the Face

and Mind of a Nation’ Disability Rights Law and Policy, International and National Perspectives. (ed. Mary Lou Breslin, Silvia Yee) Transnational Publishers: 2002, page 413

Sophie Mitra. “The Capability Approach and Disability” in Journal Of Disability Policy Studies VOL. 16/NO. 4/2006/ PP. 236–247


Stewart W Mercer, Rhona MacDonald. “Comment” in The Lancet Vol 370 August 18, 2007Third Committee-SOCHUM. Available at:http://www.un.org/en/ga/third/index.shtml The Brasilia Principles UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities United Nations 61st Session. Available at:http://www.un.org/ga/61/third/third.shtml

Victor Pineda.’AWorld Enabled’ Fighting for the Human Rights of Persons with Disabilities” in UN Chronicle. No 4, 2004

Winterwerp v. Netherlands 6301/73 (1979) Women and Girls with Disabilities. UN Enable. Available at:http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.

asp?navid=13&pid=1514 World Health Organization (WHO), The World Health Report 2001: Mental Health: New Understanding, New

Hope 1 (2001) [hereinafter World Health Report 2001

“Aid Trickles in, Misery Mounts”. The Economist. May 12th 2008. Available at: http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11358899

“Do we have a Human Right to a Healthy Environment?” April 23, 2009.Available at: http://www.wbez.org/episode-segments/do-we-have-human-right-healthy-environment

“Message of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour.” Available at: http://www.un.org/democracyfund/XNewsHumanRightsDay.htm

“Protect Right to Healthy Environment” Asia Pacific Forum. Available at: http://www.asiapacificforum.net/news/jurists-call-for-right-to-environment.html

“The right to development: a primer”, Centre for Development and Human Rights. Sage 2004

Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights “Protocol of San Salvador” Available at: http://actrav.itcilo.org/actrav-english/telearn/global/ilo/law/oasadd.htm

African [Banjul] Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, adopted June 27, 1981, OAU Doc. CAB/LEG/67/3 rev. 5, 21 I.L.M. 58 (1982)

Barbour. Brian. 2008. Embracing the ‘responsibility to protect’: a repertoire of measures including asylum for potential victims. Issues in Refugee Research: Research Paper 159. The UNHCR Policy Development and Evaluation Service. Available at: www.unhcr.org/publications,


Declaration on the Right to Development, G.A. Res. 41/128, annex, 41 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 53) at 186, U.N. Doc. A/41/153 (1986) [hereinafter DRD]

Erika Feller, Statement by the Assistant High Commissioner for Protection, at 4, delivered to the 57th Session of the Executive Committee to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, available at: http://www.unhcr.org/excom/44b36a6d2.html, Geneva, 2 October 2006.

Felix Kirchmeicher.”the Right to Development:Where do we stand?” Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.Number 23, July 2006. Available at: http://www.fes globalization.org/publicationsGeneva/FESOccPapers23.pdf

G.A. Res., GAOR 32nd Sess., U.N. Doc. A/Res/32 (1977)

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

Jasper, Susan. “US position on collective rights needs clarification” in Indian Country Today. 27 September 2010. Available at: http://www.indiancountrytoday.com/opinion/US-position-on-collective-rights-needs-clarification-103706804.html

Kent, George. “Global obligations for the right to food” Rowman & Littlefield, 2008

Lynch, Owen “Human Rights, Environment, and Economic Development: Existing and Emerging Standards in International Law and Global Society” in the Center for International Environmental Law. Available at: http://www.ciel.org/Publications/olp3iii.html

Marks, Stephen. The human right to development: Between Rhetoric and Reality. Harvard Human Rights Journal. Available at: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/hrj/iss17/marks.shtml#fn3

N. J. Udomban. “The Third World and the Right to Development: Agenda for the Next Millennium” in Human Rights Quarterly 22 (2000) 753–787 © 2000 by The Johns Hopkins University Press

Office of the UNHCR. Available at: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/development/groups/index.htm

Report of the Working Group on the Right to Development, 3d Sess., U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/ 1995/27Resolution 51/128

Stephen Marks. “The Human Rights Framework for Development: Seven Approaches” in Reflections on the Right to Development (ed. Sengupta, Negi, Basu). Centre for Development and Human Rights:2005

The Right to Development. Available at: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Development/Pages/DevelopmentIndex.aspx

Yeniva Massaquoi “Toward a Right to Development? : Reflecting on the Endorois Decision”. In Legal Frontiers. 9 April, 2010. Available at: http://www.legalfrontiers.ca/2010/04/toward-a-right-to-development-reflecting-on-the-endorois-decision/

sochum study guide worldmun 2011

Documents